School districts are being held accountable by the results of their high stakes tests. In hopes of achieving the regulated benchmarks districts have implemented scientifically based commercial reading programs (Serafini, 2005). Instead of focusing on the quality and breadth of the data used to purchase curriculum, districts need to be concerned with the characteristics and abilities of the readers they are teaching (Serafini, 2005). If reading instruction is externally controlled then teachers feel as if they are managing someone else’s program (Calkins, 2110). As Donalyn Miller (2009) stated in her book The Book Whisper: I believe that this corporate machinery of scripted programs, comprehension worksheets (reproducibles, handouts, printables, whatever you call them), computer-based incentive packages, and test-practice curricula facilitate a solid bottom line for the companies that sell them. These programs deceive schools into believing that they are using every available resource to teach reading, but ultimately, they are doomed to fail because they overlook what is most important. When you take a forklift and shovel off the programs, underneath it all is a child reading a book (page 3). Teachers who are able to make decisions about one child’s learning help them make better decisions about all students in their classrooms (Ivey, 2000). A reading workshop approach allows teachers to choose what needs to be taught based on their students’ abilities and allows students to choose what they want to read. Instead of focusing solely on the content of the text, teachers instill skills that will carry through students’ lives. Teachers teach what they believe in (Lause, 2004).
Non-Negotiables in the Teaching of Reading-Key Literacy Lessons (Harwayne, 2000):
There is no right answer to the question "How do we teach reading?" There is no one way to run a reading workshop.
Teachers in any one school can have shared hopes, expectations, and philosophical underpinnings and still run their reading workshops in markedly different ways. Even so, common teaching practices can be noted. These include reading aloud, independent reading, one-on-one conferences, shared reading, small-group guided reading and reader response groups, demonstration of reading strategies, matching students and books, word study recording students' growth needs, and interests, student response, using writing to inform reading, literacy modeling, and planning for the teaching of reading.
Prescriptive approaches to the teaching of reading cause anxiety in profession and thwart the teaching process.
The following requrements need to be in place if schools are to succeed at raising committed readers:
I believe that this corporate machinery of scripted programs, comprehension worksheets (reproducibles, handouts, printables, whatever you call them), computer-based incentive packages, and test-practice curricula facilitate a solid bottom line for the companies that sell them. These programs deceive schools into believing that they are using every available resource to teach reading, but ultimately, they are doomed to fail because they overlook what is most important. When you take a forklift and shovel off the programs, underneath it all is a child reading a book (page 3).
Teachers who are able to make decisions about one child’s learning help them make better decisions about all students in their classrooms (Ivey, 2000). A reading workshop approach allows teachers to choose what needs to be taught based on their students’ abilities and allows students to choose what they want to read. Instead of focusing solely on the content of the text, teachers instill skills that will carry through students’ lives. Teachers teach what they believe in (Lause, 2004).
Non-Negotiables in the Teaching of Reading-Key Literacy Lessons (Harwayne, 2000):